User talk:Petrosbizar

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Petrosbizar! Thank you for your contributions. I am Missvain and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Missvain (talk) 20:29, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

Hello, I'm Mr. Smart LION. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Draft:William Morton (Theatre Manager)— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Mr. Smart ℒION ⋠☎️✍⋡ 13:24, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: William Morton (Theatre Manager) (September 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Primefac was:

This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.

The comment the reviewer left was:

There's just TOOMUCH in this draft. Please trim it down to only the most important parts. The anecdote about his "first and last drink" and information about when the New Cross Public Hall was open during the week falls into the "unnecessary" category of information. I think you could probably remove about half the text without actually losing any pertinent information.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:William Morton (Theatre Manager) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Primefac (talk) 01:59, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Email

For some reason, I haven't received either of the emails you sent me, although they're listed in my notifications on Wikipedia. Is this something that could be discussed on-site? ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 17:42, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting back to me. I didn't get a copy of the emails either despite ticking the box! Fortunately the issue is resolved. I'd received a message telling me that Draft:William Morton had been deleted. I assumed that was the page I am planning to re-edit with a view to getting it accepted next time. However, the following day, I checked it out and now realise it was an empty page. My page is Draft:William Morton (theatre manager). So, panic over. But an incentive to get back to abridging my entry and then re-submitting it. Petrosbizar (talk) 18:53, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep in mind also that drafts deleted as per WP:G13 can always be returned at WP:REFUND. It's just a housekeeping thing! ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 08:03, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Writing a first article is a steep learning curve, and paranoia is always lurking round the corner! Thanks for your info and positivity. --Petrosbizar (talk) 09:12, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Petrosbizar. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:William Morton (Theatre Manager) concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:William Morton (Theatre Manager), a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:William Morton (Theatre Manager)

Hello, Petrosbizar. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "William Morton".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. » Shadowowl Marcos Rodriguez | t | SPI | AIV | Sandbox | Helpdesk » 12:57, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reminder. It is my firm intention to edit this article, following the recommendation that its length be halved. I wanted to do this in a focussed way which means setting time aside for this major re-edit. I may therefore do a preliminary re-edit to demonstrate my commitment! Petrosbizar (talk) 21:40, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017

Hello, I'm Zackmann08. Thank you for your recent contributions to William Morton (theatre manager). I noticed that when you added the image to the infobox, you added it as a thumbnail. In the future, please do not use thumbnails when adding images to an infobox (see WP:INFOBOXIMAGE). What does this mean? Well in the infobox, when you specify the image you wish to use, instead of doing it like this:

|image=[[File:SomeImage.jpg|thumb|Some image caption]]

Instead just supply the name of the image. So in this case you can simply do:

|image=SomeImage.jpg.

There will then be a separate parameter for the image caption such as |caption=Some image caption. Please note that this is a generic form message I am leaving on your page because you recently added a thumbnail to an infobox. The specific parameters for the image and caption may be different for the infobox you are using! Please consult the Template page for the infobox being used to see better documentation. Thanks! Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 23:12, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Petrosbizar. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Petrosbizar. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fanny Price edits

I see you have made Mansfield Park your project and admire your diligent work. I didn't want to spoil the article by heading it with critical notices about its reading like a personal essay, a tendency which previous messages about other articles have commented on here. Editors with longer experience are supposed to help newer editors in any case, so I'm in process of bringing your contribution closer in line with Wikipedia guidelines and will explain my changes here. First, there is no need to recapitulate the plot in such detail, and especially to bring in information that does not bear directly on Fanny. Secondly, the points you make are repeated too often. Thirdly, there is a certain amount of editorial interpretation, which counts as WP:OR without a valid reference to back it.

Looking through the article on the novel, I see there is an unsatisfactory section on Fanny which reads more like a list of critical comments than an integrated part of the article. Perhaps you could revisit that some time, shorten it to recapitulate the main points in your article on Fanny and (I haven't checked this yet) use whichever of the references given there are not considered in your separate article. All the best with your future editing. Sweetpool50 (talk) 10:48, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Sweetpool50 for your interest and comments. I've had a quick look at your first group of changes and find myself in agreement with much of what you have contributed. Fanny Price and the other character articles are very much 'work in progress'. I started with the intention of moving out material in MP as it had become overlong. Transferring some content to the character articles (which needed a lot of attention) seemed a partial solution. Removing unnecessary duplication while building up other articles takes time! There is also an imbalance amongst the character articles, e.g. there is a Thomas Bertram (actually, he is Tom Bertram) but not a Sir Thomas Bertram who is far more significant. Mr Rushworth hardly deserves his own page.

I recognise my tendency to drift towards essay style, but hopefully that is part of the journey rather than its destination. Do you want an ongoing dialogue on development, or do you regard your contribution as done? Petrosbizar (talk) 22:03, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken a longer and more detailed look at the parent article and its spin-offs and welcome your suggestion of keeping in touch as you edit. Various thoughts have been occurring to me as a result. Principally I recommend that you assemble the bulk of the spin-off articles you take in hand as off-WP drafts and only place/replace them in wikispace when you are more or less satisfied you have come to an end. On the occasions where I placed a ^{[citation needed]} tag in the Fanny article, I found that there was a reference in the original text from which you lifted the wording. I also have a higher opinion of the section on Fanny in the novel article. There is far too much retelling of the plot in the Fanny article in comparison to comment on her part in the action, whereas the analysis of the part she plays in the novel in its article is more comprehensive and useful to a reader. The purpose of an encyclopaedia is not to replace the original text with a fussy retelling but to help a reader understand and appreciate it better.

I guess you understand some of this already. I see you worked on shortening the synopsis and I have cut the text there down to the 700 words generally recommended by the MOS. I have also tried to make the description of characters more functional. Out of interest, I also read the Tom Bertram 'article' of which you disapproved and found it abominable. If you want to save it, then tell me why. I'm minded to recommend it for deletion; if you agree, we could work on the recommendation together, as well as for the others you regard as superfluous. The novel is a favorite of mine (and of yours, I guess) and it's a pity to see it travestied by self-important incompetents who might themselves be candidates for additional characters there! Sweetpool50 (talk) 16:30, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! I've read your reduced synopsis and it reads well. I've scanned description of characters and that also seems OK. I agree with your reduction in the lead. I'll reflect a bit more on the possible deletion of Thomas Bertram and of Mr Rushworth, but I incline towards deletion. Yes, this novel has grown on me. I never intended to get so involved, but it continues to reveal hidden treasures. So, it's a good experience for me, and I hope that the end product becomes an encouragement to readers to explore the novel's depths for themselves. I dip in and out of editing as time allows; I'm sure we can develop a working partnership.Petrosbizar (talk) 10:59, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think you'll have to rephrase a confused sentence (probably not your doing) in the Repton subsection that you have just restyled. Characterizing Fanny as "valuing what has emerged naturally over the centuries" in reference to avenues is not logical. The planting of these features goes back to an earlier phase of landscape planning and they could not be more unnatural. You'll need to revisit the source of the comment, and what Fanny actually says in the text, to find out her real sentiments on this question. Sweetpool50 (talk) 19:16, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, inherited material. This comes from Monaghan's article which takes a conservative stance. I think I can check the source and if so will see what can be done. Petrosbizar (talk) 10:06, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]